EU a bigger threat than Russia for denmark

[May90]

Same as in EU. It seriously existed.

Elections existed too! With Communist Party as the only candidate.

[Themessiah]

And a major part of that fault can be laid at the feet of the British people who failed to control their representatives, who allengedly failed to make them represent their wishes. (Or maybe the people just changed their mind?)
That is why I bring it up, their representatives made it happen, then for all outside parties it is their responsibility--the responsibility of those being represented that is.
If there was some problem with the representation then they should duke it out among themselves and they cannot claim uninvolved third parties were at fault.

You may wish to consider the fact that not all forms of democracies revolve around representation.

[Shalcker]

Elections existed too! With Communist Party as the only candidate.

Because just like with EU, there is no alternative to "inevitable communism/free trade solving all problems"! :P

EU is seriously quite similar to USSR; only EU political union is a lot less tighter, but then they had a lot less time to do it too.

[Azadina]

Suppression of opposing opinions is sure way to victory. Just make certain to stay on top to not get the short end of the stick.

There's a difference between opposing opinion, and just pointless spam. Want to guess which is what the OP does best? Look at his current status if it's unclear

[May90]

Because just like with EU, there is no alternative to "inevitable communism/free trade solving all problems"! :P

EU is seriously quite similar to USSR; only EU political union is a lot less tighter, but then they had a lot less time to do it too.

Ha-ha, right.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet..._states_(1940)

"In September and October 1939 the Soviet government compelled the much smaller Baltic states to conclude mutual assistance pacts which gave the Soviets the right to establish military bases there. Following invasion by the Red Army in the summer of 1940, Soviet authorities compelled the Baltic governments to resign. The presidents of Estonia and Latvia were imprisoned and later died in Siberia. Under Soviet supervision, new puppet communist governments and fellow travelers arranged rigged elections with falsified results. Shortly thereafter, the newly elected "people's assemblies" passed resolutions requesting admission into the Soviet Union. In June 1941 the new Soviet governments carried out mass deportations of "enemies of the people". Consequently, at first many Balts greeted the Germans as liberators when they occupied the area a week later."

No difference whatsoever! /s

[Shalcker]

Ha-ha, right.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet..._states_(1940)

"In September and October 1939 the Soviet government compelled the much smaller Baltic states to conclude mutual assistance pacts which gave the Soviets the right to establish military bases there. Following invasion by the Red Army in the summer of 1940, Soviet authorities compelled the Baltic governments to resign. The presidents of Estonia and Latvia were imprisoned and later died in Siberia. Under Soviet supervision, new puppet communist governments and fellow travelers arranged rigged elections with falsified results. Shortly thereafter, the newly elected "people's assemblies" passed resolutions requesting admission into the Soviet Union. In June 1941 the new Soviet governments carried out mass deportations of "enemies of the people". Consequently, at first many Balts greeted the Germans as liberators when they occupied the area a week later."

No difference whatsoever! /s

Not "no difference whatsoever" - EU isn't called Soviet Union after all. And they don't use communist ideology - though they borrowed a lot from them. But there are enough similarities elsewhere.

Both use brutal oppression of dissent (see Greece). Both use forced relocation to solve manpower shortages (see refugees). Both don't look kindly on attempts to leave.

[May90]

Not "no difference whatsoever" - EU isn't called Soviet Union after all. And they don't use communist ideology - though they borrowed a lot from them. But there are enough similarities elsewhere.

Both use brutal oppression of dissent (see Greece). Both use forced relocation to solve manpower shortages (see refugees). Both don't look kindly on attempts to leave.

"Brutal oppression of dissent" in EU? Refugees to solve manpower shortages?

Yeah, dude, this topic is not your forte.

[Shalcker]

"Brutal oppression of dissent" in EU?

People voted to reject EU demands in Greece, and their vote was ignored. At least with USSR they orchestrated vote that actually voted for their measures, EU just ignores voting outright.

Refugees to solve manpower shortages?

Yes, with dropping EU birthrates that seems like one of possible explanations of why they should be welcomed.

And i sure hope you would not call their relocation "voluntary" :P

Yeah, dude, this topic is not your forte.

Nor is it for you, yet you still post here :P

[May90]

People voted to reject EU demands in Greece, and their vote was ignored. At least with USSR they orchestrated vote that actually voted for their measures, EU just ignores voting outright.

Yes, with dropping EU birthrates that seems like one of possible explanations of why they should be welcomed.

And i sure hope you would not call their relocation "voluntary" :P

Nor is it for you, yet you still post here :P

Do you really need an explanation on the difference between voluntarily signing a contract and having to follow the obligations, with the ability to opt out at any time - and being forced a set of rules with no escape, under the threat of physical violence?

You probably do! How do they say contracts are followed in Russia? "По понятиям", right?

[Ulmita]

Do you really need an explanation on the difference between voluntarily signing a contract and having to follow the obligations, with the ability to opt out at any time - and being forced a set of rules with no escape, under the threat of physical violence?

It's not exactly like that. Sure Greeks want to follow the obligations but if you can't you can't. Lending money is a risk and any lender knows it.
Greeks voted to default (which was the correct way of action from 2009) and their wish got ignored from that sell off, left only on paper, clown Tsipras.

[May90]

It's not exactly like that. Sure Greeks want to follow the obligations but if you can't you can't. Lending money is a risk and any lender knows it.
Greeks voted to default (which was the correct way of action from 2009) and their wish got ignored from that sell off, left only on paper, clown Tsipras.

One side cannot just decide to default, when it has obligations before the other side. If you can't pay off the loan, too bad, but you can't just say, "Okay, I can't pay it, so I choose default".

Which, again, is what separates countries like Greece or Russia from civilized world. You (as a society) do not understand that any decent relationship goes two ways. One side demanding that the other follows the obligation is quite different from one side randomly imposing obligations on the other it makes up on the fly.

[Shalcker]

Do you really need an explanation on the difference between voluntarily signing a contract and having to follow the obligations, with the ability to opt out at any time - and being forced a set of rules with no escape, under the threat of physical violence?

Predatory contracts are not really any better. Removing ability to recover and selling off everything that could be used to recover isn't good solution to loan problems.

Bankruptcy exists for a reason. Loaning is risk, if you fail to estimate it right you're supposed to take a loss.

You probably do! How do they say contracts are followed in Russia? "По понятиям", right?

We just make them now in a way that makes exiting them more costly then remaining in them - as you see with Bulgaria and their cancellation of South Stream and nuclear plant, for which they had to pay penalties in tune of several billions euro to please EU and US higher ups.

But they still can exit.

- - - Updated - - -

One side cannot just decide to default, when it has obligations before the other side.

Yes it can. It is 100% allowed.

If you can't pay off the loan, too bad, but you can't just say, "Okay, I can't pay it, so I choose default".

You can, as long as you can prove you cannot pay it off.

Which, again, is what separates countries like Greece or Russia from civilized world. You (as a society) do not understand that any decent relationship goes two ways. One side demanding that the other follows the obligation is quite different from one side randomly imposing obligations on the other it makes up on the fly.

But German obligations imposed on Greece were not in initial contract - they were indeed imposed "on the fly".

Non-solution forced upon population just to please banks and avoid messy defaults.

[Ulmita]

One side cannot just decide to default, when it has obligations before the other side. If you can't pay off the loan, too bad, but you can't just say, "Okay, I can't pay it, so I choose default".

This is exactly how it works. Exactly.

[May90]

Predatory contracts are not really any better. Removing ability to recover and selling off everything that could be used to recover isn't good solution to loan problems.

Bankruptcy exists for a reason. Loaning is risk, if you fail to estimate it right you're supposed to take a loss.

We just make them now in a way that makes exiting them more costly then remaining in them - as you see with Bulgaria and their cancellation of South Stream and nuclear plant, for which they had to pay penalties in tune of several billions euro to please EU and US higher ups.

But they still can exit.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes it can. It is 100% allowed.

You can, as long as you can prove you cannot pay it off.

But German obligations imposed on Greece were not in initial contract - they were indeed imposed "on the fly".

Non-solution forced upon population just to please banks and avoid messy defaults.

Google Search is a good instrument to get some basic knowledge on how contracts work and how EU operates.

[Meanshield]

The Danish have the weirdest politicians out there

Compared to Donald Trump, the danish politicians are saints.

[Eggroll]

Every country can deal with every other country, that doesn't mean that the given trade will be fair or with equal terms.
To answer you regarding EEC, this was established upon the ECSC and was just a pre-entry stage of the following E.U. merge.
The reason behind this union was not just a mere trading idea, but to come together as a continent and embrace each other, after a century of insanely bloodshed and misery.
Trade alone can't stop aggression and war. There are various examples regarding this.
Everyone seems to think that peace and stability came on its own one day and till this day just stays around.
Things are not like that and you can see it clearly with retarded countries going gung-ho around creating pressure for their own agenda.
Instead of trying to act solo, maybe you guys should have tried first to make things come around your way.
Just saying...

I find it funny that the pro EU faction always seems to credit the existence of the EU for the relative peace among the EU countries since WW2. Where are the facts to prove your claims?

[Serenais]

It's not clear to me that worrying about the erosion of national identity is "dumb".

I find this claim about erosion of national identity interesting. Did Wales lose its national identity, despite being part of UK for centuries? Scotland? Ireland? Moravia, despite being part of Czech state since at least 10th century? Quebec, despite being in Canada since day 1?
What is this national identity you speak of, anyway. Feeling, say, Czech? Or Danish? Or Polish? I see no reason why I couldn't feel both Czech and European, considering that I am both.
In fact, what about those who feel Faroese? Greenlandic? Moravian? Silesian? If we are to be "democratic", we need to let them be what they feel to be in their own countries - that means, free Faroes, free Greenland, free Moravia, free Silesia, not their current countries - be careful, though, outside their own areas, such an idea might be quite unpopular. If we don't, aren't we just a bunch of hypocrites?
In fact, I quite identify with the town I grew up in the most. I guess, just based on that, I should want it to be independent, otherwise I might find my national identity threatened. Despite not living there anymore, and it having absolutely zero influence on mine or anyone else's life.

So, are "we" going to go with the nationalistic crap to its logical conclusion, or just as far as it gets "us" into the easy jobs in local assemblies and parliaments?

[Noradin]

I find this claim about erosion of national identity interesting. Did Wales lose its national identity, despite being part of UK for centuries? Scotland? Ireland? Moravia, despite being part of Czech state since at least 10th century? Quebec, despite being in Canada since day 1?

Well, England is working hard to make Wales lose its language at least, like they did to Cornwall, it is the EU that provides funds to keep those languages alive.

[Serenais]

I find it funny that the pro EU faction always seems to credit the existence of the EU for the relative peace among the EU countries since WW2. Where are the facts to prove your claims?

I don't know, maybe the fact that before the time of EU, the last time there was a relative peace between countries in Europe was called "Pax Romana"? The very reason for creation of the forerunner of EU, the ECSC, was because there was the idea that two states with interconnected industries have it very tough to make war on one another - you know, to avoid another WW2, which ended just seven years before ECSC was put into effect.

- - - Updated - - -

Well, England is working hard to make Wales lose its language at least, like they did to Cornwall, it is the EU that provides funds to keep those languages alive.

Ironic, isn't it?

[In Ogres We Trust]

I totally agree with her, EU is a fascist organization that seeks to undo everything danish from denmark!

http://www.thelocal.dk/20160823/dani...at-than-russia

In an interview with Mandag Morgen, Krarup said that the EU is an existential threat to Denmark and is a much bigger problem than Russia.

"For Denmark? Yes, without a doubt. Just Schengen alone is a catastrophe. It’s something that will make Denmark disappear from the world map if we don’t pull ourselves together. That national borders have been disbanded is a threat against Denmark’s existence,” she told the magazine.

Ignoring the fact that I agree with the conclusion about the EU being a threat to Europe, it's apparent that you don't understand the actual meaning of the term, fascist.

- - - Updated - - -

One side cannot just decide to default, when it has obligations before the other side. If you can't pay off the loan, too bad, but you can't just say, "Okay, I can't pay it, so I choose default".

Which, again, is what separates countries like Greece or Russia from civilized world. You (as a society) do not understand that any decent relationship goes two ways. One side demanding that the other follows the obligation is quite different from one side randomly imposing obligations on the other it makes up on the fly.

Yes, in actuality, you can. It's called bankruptcy, and as a sovereign state, they're never obligated to follow the dictates of an outside organization or nation-state. On a side note, the fact that you're bashing Greece or Russia is rather comical since Western Europe is built on the backs of the Greeks, and Greece and Russia faced the bulk of the invasions/incursions from the Arabs, Turks, and Mongols throughout the centuries.